Qualifying round Check-in at JP Moseley will be between 8:15-9:00 am SHARP! There will be NO exceptions to this! as I need enough time to finish there and move everything to Perkerson Park for the afternoon Qualifier Event.Qualifying round at Perkerson Park will be at approximately 2PM with check-in between 1:15-2PMQualifying round Check-in at North Georgia Canopy Tours will be between 8:45-9:30 am SHARP! There will be NO exceptions to this!

Finals at NGCT will begin at approximately 1:00 with tee times for the 18 finalists in 3 somes (6 from each round) with the first 6 qualifiers from Moseley teeing off first, then the 6 Perkerson qualifiers, followed by the 6 NGCT qualifiers.

This years chance to play in the USDGC is going to be done a little differently than in the past.

There will be be THREE chances to qualify - on SAT MAY 5th - first at the southernmost par 61 course in the metro area, then a chance at the central metro area course (now a par 59-60) - and then the 3rd round and the finals which will be held at the northenmost par 61 course in the metro area on SUN MAY 6th - which should give all areas of the state the best chances to play a qualifying round close to them as well as give people who work either SAT or SUN a chance to make one day or the other.

It will start on SAT morning MAY 5th at JP Moseley, followed by a SAT afternoon qualifying round at "theP" and then the 6 qualified players from each round on SAT (12 players total) will get an expense free stay SAT night at the site of the finals in the TeePees with electric and A/C (if you so choose so you can play /practice the finals course SUN morning) The finals will be held SUNDAY with TEE times for the 18 qualified players after the 3rd qualifying round at NGCT and a short lunch break.

These will be PDGA C-Tier sanctioned 1 round separate Events with a low entry fee of $25 (add $10 if you are not a current PDGA member by MAY 1st). if you play in more than 1 qualifying round the fee for the other round(s) played will only be $20 and paid at the 2nd and/or 3rd round check-in.Online signup will be available shortly with a 54 player limit per round.$10 of each entry will go towards the overall winners ENTRY to the USDGC and the remaining money from the $10 per entry (if any) will be given to the winner for their expenses before the USDGC. $10 of each entry will go towards the prize fund for each round with additional prizes to be awarded to the Performance edition winners from each round.There will be 3 persons qualifying at each course from the Competition field (Top 3 scratch scores) and 3 from the Performance field (top 3 ratings adjusted scores using the USDGC formula)Anyone is welcome to play but please keep in mind that the OVERALL winner will be determined by the PERFORMANCE scoring of the 18 competitors in the final round at NGCT. The OVERALL winner may register in either the Competition field or the Performance field if they meet the USDGC qualifications listed below in red.

Performance Scoring creates a projected score based on a player’s skill level, course difficulty, and layout. After the round, each player’s performance is evaluated by comparing their projected score with their actual score.All USDGC entrants must be current PDGA members. Performance Flight competitors must have a rating of 875 or higher and have played a minimum of 12 rated rounds between November 1, 2011 and October 1, 2012.Performance Flight competitors will gain entry through events selected by PDGA State Coordinators. Preferably, Disc Golf United’s Performance Scoring used at the local tourney will determine the qualifier. State and National representative spots must also register by August 31st.

I have received the performance based scoring spreadsheet to use for the qualifying rounds this weekend for the state rep spot for the USDGC!

I have breakdowns available from 800 rated to 1040 rated for all 3 courses based on the SSA acquired from PDGA Sanctioned Tournament play in 2011.

Here is a general info look at scores needed to be EVEN PAR performance based wise for each course in order of round being played - JP, "theP", NGCT:850 rated - 71, 75, 69900 rated - 66, 70, 64950 rated - 60, 64, 591000 rated - 55, 59 ,54

As a point of reference - I plugged in the scores from the winners in each of the divisions at NGCT where the finals are being held from the March GSSS Event with performance based scoring to come up with following.

As you can see most everyone was within a few strokes of each other with ratings spread 80 points apart performance based scoring wise - showing that ANYONE and EVERYONE has a legitimate chance to be the state rep!

Come on out and give yourself a shot to be the state rep with free entry and possibly some spending cash.

KeithSo now is the time to start planning for the chance to play in one of the premiere Events in the country at the USDGC and to see some of the top players in the world compete side by side with you if you are the talented state rep winner from Georgia.

Thanks KeithNo need for the "as stated" btw...You should know that not everyone can understand the way you explain things sometimes... (me in particular lol)I'm sure your phrasing makes sense in your head, but the way I read it (the multiple times I read it) I still didn't get it all the way, and wanted to make sure.

Rich Meade wrote:Thanks KeithNo need for the "as stated" btw...You should know that not everyone can understand the way you explain things sometimes... (me in particular lol)I'm sure your phrasing makes sense in your head, but the way I read it (the multiple times I read it) I still didn't get it all the way, and wanted to make sure.

Don't take it personal Rich - As anyone on here can tell you for the 6 &1/2 years I've been here - if anyone doesn't read what is written I will point it out and have had others point it out to me when I've messed up - and it is always usually right there in front of someone.

I hope to see you and everyone else wanting a chance to represent show up for one of the 3 rounds to qualify.

Can someone please explain the Performance Scoring to me? I understand that it's based on your projected score and what you actually shoot. but how do you come up with your projected score for the course based on rating?

If I understand it properly, your projected score is actually projected AFTER the round is over because it's based on the SSA of the round. This means that the 1000 rated round is calculated off the scores of the propagators and then used to project what you should have scored based on your current rating. If you scored better than that, you win!

Bootsie wrote:rich meade did you finish 2nd grade because if you can read and retain the information longer then 60 seconds everyone of your questions the answer for it is in the top post

Bootsie (if he had used 2nd grade grammar, punctuation and capitalization) wrote:Rich Meade, did you finish the 2nd grade? Because if you could read and retain the information for longer then 60 seconds, the answer to every one of your questions is in the top post.

If I understand this correctly... you have a 900 rated player and a 1000 rated player that shoot the same score on the same course. Ultimately, the 900 rated player would be the winner because his/her projected score would be much lower therefore giving him/her a higher rated round? I understand that is just handicap golf, but Thank You GVAN for explaining how you come up with the projection.

Bootsie wrote:rich meade did you finish 2nd grade because if you can read and retain the information longer then 60 seconds everyone of your questions the answer for it is in the top post

eh, it's a flaw I know... I sometimes have a hard time interpreting people's explanations....And I learned at an early age to just ask the dumb questions because inevitably someone else will have the same dumb question.

If you have a problem with me asking questions Bootsie... hang around after a round and we'll talk about it... (if you finish a round that is...)

brick wrote:Why in the world would you have the first round of qualifying be real scoring and the final performance scoring? Why not just drop the performance scoring all together?

Because the state rep's only get in from Performance scoring this year for the most part as there are only 72 spots for each field in the USDGC - but just like Feldberg proved last year - Scratch scoring can and does have the chance to be competitive for a round, so having EVERYONE have a shot at Representing the state is better than the spot going to waste.

I think (in MY opinion) that the 3 par 61 courses will give the Scratch players an even chance to compete as most will play smart enough golf to be at or under their projected score making it the most fair way to give ALL of the states players an equal chance to be the rep.

The only other option would to just choose the lowest rated and fastest / most improving player from the state and say "you're it".

I think my way of doing it with taking the 3 scratch and 3 performance based from each of the 3 qualifiers and giving them all 1 shot at a performance based round to be the rep is the most fair way to give everyone a shot.

You could just nominate me!...had I had an 850 rating last year before the Global (I was 837 at the time), I would have qualified (I had top performance play of the entire Global tourney...averaging 881 rounds)...but alas I didn't have the rating...I would have had a good shot at winning the USDGC too.

But I like the idea of having to come out and play for it...But I do see how it's daunting for the scratch players...when there are a lot of players like me, that their ratings don't reflect their actual play (because of slow updates...not because of sandbagging).

If this kind of thing doesn't sound fair... Pull a Nate Doss, and just stay home...

brick wrote:Why in the world would you have the first round of qualifying be real scoring and the final performance scoring? Why not just drop the performance scoring all together?

I think my way of doing it with taking the 3 scratch and 3 performance based from each of the 3 qualifiers and giving them all 1 shot at a performance based round to be the rep is the most fair way to give everyone a shot.

@ Keith -- are you going to setup Perkerson to get it playable? I don't have time to get it ready for this event, I'm already spending all free time working on it (since January 1st), and I will not be able to play on Saturday. I wanted to throw this out there in a public thread so there aren't any surprises when you/others show up next Saturday.

I'd also like to invite anyone who intends to play (especially anyone planning to whine about the event/course) to come out and help Sunday to make it look nice. Doing so will enhance your experience next weekend.

To qualify that question:#1 - Right now 4 of the baskets, 3 of which will be in play, have no chains. We're trying very hard to get that fixed on this Sunday, but not sure we'll have time to source the materials. Go figure, but as I've learned today, all course-quality disc golf baskets use an impossible-to-find-locally chain (#2/0 straight link hot-dipped galvanized steel). Home Depot has a close substitute that we might use, but waiting to get Dave Mc's input on that option. We may need to get Gateway to mail them to us. So it's 50/50 chance that all baskets will have chains next Saturday. Those holes are fully playable, but makes putting from 10' out difficult on those holes.

#2 - Right now the course is not marked very well at all. We simply haven't had time to do it as we've been focused on cutting all 18 holes out first with very weak turnouts of people helping. There is a very good chance that all holes will have carpet teepads put out this Sunday, but no guarantees. There will not be signs, unless you make them. I can provide maps and scorecards that have distances, but it will be confusing for people unfamiliar with the course.

I'll give an update after Sunday as to status on these.

If we get a good turnout (30+ people) at the Big Perkerson Workday event this Sunday, the course will be looking very good for the event (minus the lack of tee signs). It's already just 1/2 a fairway (1st half of hole #10) away from having 18 fully playable holes. After that we'll be able to spend time making the rough holes look much better, setting up more teepads and fixing/tweaking a lot of spots. But -- we've had much less help than I expected to date, basically a core group of about 5 people, so who knows how much we'll accomplish. People seem very interested in playing the course, but much less interested in helping make it playable. The lack of help is discouraging and this will be my last big volunteer project for a long time.

John - if you can just shoot me a PM or post here the document with holes and distances, ill go with it.

I'm working at NGCT and McCurry both days this weekend and will use 'theMose" and 'theP" as they are that day as I have no way to prep them.I'll probably use what Steve Adams used for the Bag tag challenge at JP and I have also asked Wade (if he has time) to set the baskets in the Hotlanta $ layout from last year positions.

I'm trusting you to at least give me a map and distances (as I'm pretty sure you already have that down somewhere) and we'll play it on the fly if it isn't "ready" by SAT MAY 5th for the afternoon round.It will play the same for everyone and will give people the mental toughness needed to play the USDGC if they are one of the 6 qualifiers to come from that course if nothing else.

I already warned you before about the help you would probably get, so I expect it to be only a little better mixing in playing with the workday - a sad but realistic way thing go.

Hopefully you will come up on SUN since you can't play SAT to take your shot at the spot.

There is basically just spray painting REC tees, and Drop zone / mando lines and putting the OB string down betwen 8/9 - the main thing I'd like help with is making sure someone with a key can move any baskets that need to be moverd to match the hole descriptions posted.

Thanks in advance and i'll see you tomorrow somewhere when you guys are playing,

Perkerson condition update: The course now has 18 playable holes with valid fairways. Every hole has a carpet teepad for the long position. The edges are rough in the woods, but really not bad. Most of the holes will need some tweaking to get optimized, but the layout is very playable in current condition. You'll need a map to navigate as there are no signs. We added a new creek crossing after (old hole #12, down into the corne), so the course now flows pretty well. 3 of the baskets (hole 8, 10 & 11) are missing chains, as is the practice basket. Still trying to source the chain so depending on how fast that happens, it may be reattached next Saturday morning or could be a week later.

@ Keith: for OB lines during the event next weekend, I'd suggest playing it the way we have been in league, which is that the OB line is the edge of the creekbed and beyond for #1-4, and creek and beyond for the holes with water.

Thanks for the update John - I am letting YOU set the hole descriptions and distances the way you want them to be for the course - since it a PDGA sanctioned Event that will generate ratings and a SSA for the course, as well as the fact I've not seen the new layout - I'm counting on you to let me know what I'll be seeing on SAT around 2 PM when I estimate that myself and others who want to try again will be there after the morning round at "the Mose".There will also hopefully be players wanting to qualify at "theP' who maybe will show up early to get a look at the course and you can send them out with a map and clippers (make it a requirement to take clippers to get a map ) for the workday.

No - if that is the case it would slide to the next player in whatever category you chose NOT to take, similar to the way the USDGC does with anyone who has already qualiifed finishing ahead of you at National Events.

Please let anyone you know who might be interested that doesn't frequent the message boards about the USDGC Qualifiers so that everyone in the state has the opportunity to represent the state of Georgia.

I have received the performance based scoring spreadsheet to use for the qualifying rounds this weekend for the state rep spot for the USDGC!

I have breakdowns available from 800 rated to 1040 rated for all 3 courses based on the SSA acquired from PDGA Sanctioned Tournament play in 2011.

Here is a general info look at scores needed to be EVEN PAR performance based wise for each course in order of round being played - JP, "theP", NGCT:850 rated - 71, 75, 69900 rated - 66, 70, 64950 rated - 60, 64, 591000 rated - 55, 59 ,54

As a point of reference - I plugged in the scores from the winners in each of the divisions at NGCT where the finals are being held from the March GSSS Event with performance based scoring to come up with following.

As you can see most everyone was within a few strokes of each other with ratings spread 80 points apart performance based scoring wise - showing that ANYONE and EVERYONE has a legitimate chance to be the state rep!

Come on out and give yourself a shot to be the state rep with free entry and possibly some spending cash.

I'm running pre-USDGC round doubles action @ Perkerson for anyone wanting to warmup for the afternoon round, or for anyone wanting to play the course. I just played it for the first time after the big workday last week and it's finally playing very good. There will not be chains on 3 of the baskets that are in play, however they really aren't that bad to put on -- Chris hit one from 30' out tonight sans chains, it just means you start sweating putts at about 15' out.

I have sent multiple emails and spoke with someone at the rec center about seeing what we could do about having the course mowed before sat. I also offered up that some of us locals at Moseley would be more than willing to come out whatever day they could fit it in and help in any way we could. As of yet, I have not had any response from the parks department. So with that being said, I would highly suggest wearing pants on Sat. morning if you plan on playing. The grass is some spots is waist to chest high. Not the entire park, but here and there could def. use a good cleanup. If I don't hear anything back by tomorrow, I will try my best to get out there with a weed eater and hit the spots that need the most work on Friday.

$10 of each entry will go towards the overall winners ENTRY to the USDGC and the remaining money from the $10 per entry (if any) will be given to the winner for their expenses before the USDGC. $10 of each entry will go towards the prize fund for each round with additional prizes to be awarded to the Performance edition winners from each round.

With the entry fee for the Performance edition only being $100, this years GA Rep should win enough to cover most of the expenses, which is really awesome!

Does it mean the other $10 (and additional prizes) are ONLY going to be paid on based on Performance scoring?

$10 of each entry will go towards the overall winners ENTRY to the USDGC and the remaining money from the $10 per entry (if any) will be given to the winner for their expenses before the USDGC. $10 of each entry will go towards the prize fund for each round with additional prizes to be awarded to the Performance edition winners from each round.

With the entry fee for the Performance edition only being $100, this years GA Rep should win enough to cover most of the expenses, which is really awesome!

Does it mean the other $10 (and additional prizes) are ONLY going to be paid on based on Performance scoring?

There will be the usual side action option for the scratch players as in the past USDGC qualifiers, and hopefully enough people will show up to make your statement a reality.

Lots of people "SAYING" they will be playing a round somewhere, but the one downside as always to not having it be pre-reg only is that you never know who or how many will show up.

I do have EVERY current and non current member ratings for the 4 state area, (6194 players) so anyone trying to use a non current member rating from 2007 when you have been playing for 5 years as a non member will NOT be using the 2007 rating.

Non-current means you are playing at whatever your REAL rating would be if you had been current all along -so please don't try to pull any cute stuff - I've been doing this for 17 years on MAY 5th, so I won't be buying it.

I want this to be fair for everyone that would like to represent the state.

The USDGC is also doing an article on the unique "USDGC like" qualifying format I'm using as they were intriqued by what I had come up with and want to see how it pans out. It will either be up this weekend or early next week.

We are replacing the worst ones (slightly rusted) but some of the ones we replaced are in good shape.

Was going to give the extra chain to Deerlick, but might be better utilized at The "P"

It would, it's all the same kind of chain (#2/0 straight link coil galvanized). We'll definitely take any extra you have, as I don't think this will be a one time thing. But, I've tracked down the chain manufacturer and have ordered replacement chain for these 4. Just won't be here by tomorrow.

$Dollar$ wrote:You didn't answer my question. Where will the other $10 go and how will it be paid out?

Your question doesn't make sense since there is no "extra $10" to go anywhere.

READ - It's all there in the first post copied here : These will be PDGA C-Tier sanctioned 1 round separate Events with a low entry fee of $25 (add $10 if you are not a current PDGA member by MAY 1st). if you play in more than 1 qualifying round the fee for the other round(s) played will only be $20 and paid at the 2nd and/or 3rd round check-in.Online signup will be available shortly with a 54 player limit per round.$10 of each entry will go towards the overall winners ENTRY to the USDGC and the remaining money from the $10 per entry (if any) will be given to the winner for their expenses before the USDGC. $10 of each entry will go towards the prize fund for each round with additional prizes to be awarded to the Performance edition winners from each round.

Andy Campbell declines qualifying invite due to prior commitments and playoff between Mason and Riley is cancelled.

4 new players show up for "theP" plius Matlack donates another 10 towards winner and both he and Tyler kick in 10 each towards 2nd round prize pool to make 2 3somes- 50 bucks more to kitty (130 total)for winners entry.

Dollar declines entry to go back to Macon and Bradshaw declines spot due to injury leaving Plotky and Schatz to join the other 6 from Moseley at NGCT tomorrow for the finals, where they will join the 6 qualifiers from the morning NGCT round to make 14 players vying for the winners spot.You CAN and are encouraged to show up to enter SUN (unlike GSSS Events there IS day of signups availalble)

Qualifying round Check-in at North Georgia Canopy Tours will be between 8:45-9:30 am SHARP! There will be NO exceptions to this!

Finals at NGCT will begin at approximately 1:00 with tee times for the 14 scheduled finalists qualifiers from Moseley teeing off first, then the 2 Perkerson qualifiers, and the 6 NGCT qualifiers in 2 4 somes following them.

it really looks like those projected scores based of your rating are right on being that every single one of them the player shot under there projection except dollar in the first round. what a joke projected scores are. lame

3rd Qualifying round underway as of 9:35AM....players should be coming up to the Chicken Shack soon!

Only 4 players make it out to represent this morning, so they are all in regardless of score.

Finals will consist of the 8 from yesterday plus 4 from this morning with the first tee time at 1PM

...I don't know what other formats to try to get people excited about playing the USDGC - I think for my final year as SC - I'll just give it to myself for putting up with the apathy of people SAYING they want a chance to play in the USDGC, but then NEVER following through while I give up several hours and days over the last 4 years for 10-15 people - might as well as just raffled off the spot this year for 25 bucks each - I could have spent the weekend with my family instead.

If you wouldn't have done the "failure" based scoring in the last round you would have had several more that just I know of. I appreciate you putting on the event but the format just didn't make any sense.

And your Representative from the state of Georgia is.....................

Tim Ellis who who shooting a 49 scratch giving him a performance based score of -6 even with a 995 rating!!!

Next best was a 3 way tie for 2nd with Mason Carruth(956), John Matlack(974) and Jon Plotky(948) with a -3

The only player rated under 950 who was UNDER their performance based score was Plotky.

When the course is not a pitch and putt course it comes down to who makes the least mistakes and doesn't try to play outside their game.

Congrats again to Tim and it is a real shame that everyone that spoke to Sergio thought it was MY choice to do performance based for the final round instead of actually READING where ther state reps that got in by first come first served were allowed to play - which is ONLY in the performance based side - thereby making it the way the state reps should be decided as that's what they'll have to win by in OCT Rock Hill.

And everyone who shied away because of it hopefully will now see that it didn't matter what format was used - it matters who is playing that format.

Every one of the 12 finalists all told me the same thing about loving the format - even the ones who were worrying about everyone elses Projected Score - which didn't really matter as each person needed to beat THEIR OWN Projected Score - not someone elses.

By the way Tim's 49 also beat the course record that he set there 7 weeks ago by 3 stokes!

Tim also got an ace on Hole 9 "B" position basket in the Qualifying morning round - so an all around good day for Tim.

I am guestimating that the round of 49 will be rated around 1050 give or take 8 points.

As soon as I get the info from the PDGA - I'll upload the scores.

Congrats again to Tim on 2 in a row as state Rep. it was also Tim who was the State rep in 2010 when the USDGC was a scratch only Event.

$Dollar$ wrote:Wow, that Perkerson round came out super low. The rating system does not work at all when that few people play

Sometimes you don't need to take a course in statistics to see the flaw in the rating system.

Lots of complaints about the ratings system...What is YOUR solution? Remember you will have to maintain it for all the PDGA members that want updates immediately and want nothing but higher ratings every update.

I would like to see ratings based on the course instead of the players that attend. Then, have a a scale that adds points to the round ratings based on wind (like 1 point per MPH) and rain.

There are several big issues about switching to this kind of system which would include1. Courses that have lots of different pin positions2. Temp courses3. Obtaining course ratings to start with

I think that we could use the current system to slowly transition to a standard course rating system. A course would get it's rating after 3 separate events on the same layout or 8 rated rounds with at least 2 different fields. Any course that doesnt have a rating would just use the old rating system for round ratings, until that course layout earned one.

They could even average the course rating and the player ratings for a more consistent round rating.

The reason it's unlikely to change in any significant way in the near future is this:

The current rating system works pretty well.Many proposed alternatives seem like they would work pretty well.No proposed alternative seems significantly better.

An alternative must be enough of an improvement to justify the cost of change. This Includes monetary cost, but also convincing the thousands of people that are satisfied with the current system that it must change.

The genius of the current system is that it's pretty much self correcting. Did they clear out a bunch of obstacles on #5 at Alexander? No need to send someone to investigate and reevaluate the course. It works itself out.

$Dollar$ wrote:Wow, that Perkerson round came out super low. The rating system does not work at all when that few people play

Thats what happens when you have 3 under 950 and 2 over 950 players all playing within 3 strokes of each other - the top rating isn't that high.

Secondly they could be worse - I listed the par as 61 and not the 58-59 that Ritger said the new course is at - I figured the 4 chainless baskets evened that out - so I left it at 61 - the rounds for Moseley and the Finals look like the ratings worked out perfectly as both are a few points off of what I projected they would be.

There are too extreme examples for which the rating system fails. The first being a low sample size (or sample size that doesn't include many players rated over 1000). We can see from the results of this tourney that the Perkerson rounds didn't approach what is indicative of their true rating. A larger sample size would correct this.

The other way the rating system fails is when the par for a course becomes too high. A perfect example of this was Hotlanta 2010. First round was played on the 27-hole par-100 Flyboy layout. A very challenging course and some people shot some really good scores out there that day. Unfortunately since there wasn't a large scoring separation each stroke meant a large ratings jump. This is similar to what you see happen on a course with a low SSA (like Lenora). So where by Dollar and Childs both shot in the 80's there were rewarded with round rating barely over 1000.

$Dollar$ wrote:Wow, that Perkerson round came out super low. The rating system does not work at all when that few people play

Thats what happens when you have 3 under 950 and 2 over 950 players all playing within 3 strokes of each other - the top rating isn't that high.

Secondly they could be worse - I listed the par as 61 and not the 58-59 that Ritger said the new course is at - I figured the 4 chainless baskets evened that out - so I left it at 61 - the rounds for Moseley and the Finals look like the ratings worked out perfectly as both are a few points off of what I projected they would be.

Whatever the TD sets the course par at has absolutely nothing to do with ratings, par is relative. I imagine a course like perkerson does have a higher SSA similar to the courses at IDGC.

mrpbody33 wrote:It is true. For what the SSA achieves there isn't much better.

There are too extreme examples for which the rating system fails. The first being a low sample size (or sample size that doesn't include many players rated over 1000). We can see from the results of this tourney that the Perkerson rounds didn't approach what is indicative of their true rating. A larger sample size would correct this.

The other way the rating system fails is when the par for a course becomes too high. A perfect example of this was Hotlanta 2010. First round was played on the 27-hole par-100 Flyboy layout. A very challenging course and some people shot some really good scores out there that day. Unfortunately since there wasn't a large scoring separation each stroke meant a large ratings jump. This is similar to what you see happen on a course with a low SSA (like Lenora). So where by Dollar and Childs both shot in the 80's there were rewarded with round rating barely over 1000.

I agree with Barry and Dollar on this, a larger sample size prob would have helped the ratings spread for Perkerson. The one downside tho is with more players there is a larger chance a 910 rated player could shoot a hot round and bring the ratings down. I noticed this happening with some of the Global Women's results(in the events that used men for propagators), when a 930 rated player shoots a 1060 rated round its just going to bring all the ratings down for that round. Which subsequently effected the women on the global level.

Now as far as Flyboy goes, I would think that not enough rated rounds have been played on that par 100 layout to give it an accurate (high enough) SSA.....just a guess though.

Ridesbrd wrote:Now as far as Flyboy goes, I would think that not enough rated rounds have been played on that par 100 layout to give it an accurate (high enough) SSA.....just a guess though.

SSA is calculated on the fly, if I understand it properly. Number of rated rounds in the past will have no impact on a current round's rating.

I believe this is true/also slightly misleading, a course has an established lets call it SSA average as well as an SSA for an individual round which is based off that courses SSA average and what people shot. Per Chuck the SSA for the Steady Ed course for example depends on the layout of pins, but ranges from 53.1-61.6. Each layout has a specific SSA, which was provided to me from Chuck. I may be understanding the process wrong and he just gives me the numbers for shits and giggles, knowing him well that is very possible.

Ridesbrd wrote:I believe this is true/also slightly misleading, a course has an established lets call it SSA average as well as an SSA for an individual round which is based off that courses SSA average and what people shot.

Perhaps he gave you an average SSA (ASSA?) but I don't believe it is used in round ratings.

Chuck on PDGA Ask Chuck thread wrote: The SSA for each round is temporarily calculated based on the scores and ratings of propagators [...] Once the SSA is calculated from propagators with acceptable round ratings, everyone who played that layout will get a round rating from that SSA regardless whether they are a propagator or not, or a member or not.

$Dollar$ wrote:Wow, that Perkerson round came out super low. The rating system does not work at all when that few people play

Thats what happens when you have 3 under 950 and 2 over 950 players all playing within 3 strokes of each other - the top rating isn't that high.

Secondly they could be worse - I listed the par as 61 and not the 58-59 that Ritger said the new course is at - I figured the 4 chainless baskets evened that out - so I left it at 61 - the rounds for Moseley and the Finals look like the ratings worked out perfectly as both are a few points off of what I projected they would be.

Whatever the TD sets the course par at has absolutely nothing to do with ratings, par is relative. I imagine a course like perkerson does have a higher SSA similar to the courses at IDGC.

I was meaning in relation to the Performance based scoring par which was based on historical ratings from 2 "theP" Ice Bowl Events that were used by Innova to set the projected scores as the new layout has no data to use.

I did not see much of the course except a few holes near the pavilion, but the 4-5 holes I saw were MUCH easier than the old layout and i'm pretty sure that all those know that a 55 was probably not close to the best decent score available and with all 5 of them that finished being that close in score and Dollar being the only 100 rated with the others all below 950 except Matlack - it wasn't going to produce a 100 rated round score - I projected (again without seeing the course except on an overhead map and with hole distances provided by Ritger) that a 49-50 would be 1000 rated and the ratings that came out with a 55 pretty much proved that theoretical guess.

Perkerson ratings appear skewed based on small sample size of people shooting relatively well. A 49-50 would definitely be well above 1000 rated in tourney play. I've only played it 3 times now, but most people have been shooting above par in limited league play. Due to the bridges limiting routing options and safety concern limitations, the easiest holes are bunched up on the front 9 and near the pavilion. But don't worry, they will be stretched out in time.

Ya, Keith you can't pat yourself on the back for trying to guess how a course rates out when you havent even played it. The way we played it that day would DEFINITELY have been 1000 rated with a full field.

You could be right, BUT the whole idea that you can't predict ratings on a course with just knowing distances and foliage and being accurate is false.

It is EXACTLY how the DGU comes up with projected scores and how designers use distances and foliage and OB's, etc. to help scoring separations on a given tract.

I've seen every inch of "theP" plenty of times, seen 100's of courses and pieces of land to put courses on so I don't need to see every hole to guerss at what a 1000 rated score would be on a given day with the given weather conditions and players playing it.

You can ask anyone who's ever asked me what rating a score will be form the course we are on and I've been within a few ratings points almost 100% of the time - It's not rocket science, just basic math. I do understand the smaller field theory, but you have to admit that "theP" is nowhere near as tough or challenging as the old usual layout and you had a 55 and 983 rating at the USDGC Qualifier with 5 finishers and a 58 rated 1009 at the last PDGA Event using the old layout in 2011 with 54 players playing the same course - 27 ratings points difference with roughly what would be the same score with the course being 3-4 easier now. (according to the chart and Ritger) and 49 less people - not that much of a statistical difference and only 2 shots less would have been 1000 rated - not 5 as I said earlier - (was thinking 4-5 down off of 54 not course par of 58 which would have been 53-54 ot be 1000 rated round)

Sorry for the confusion on my part - I was thinking 4-5 down but not translating that to course par. That's what I get for always thinking of adding scorecards that way.